If you want BS or Political Correctness you have come to the wrong place.

FAQ How can you be an atheist Jew?

An atheist is one who disbelieves in (or denies) the existence of God, Gods, and other supernatural beings.
A Jew is any person whose mother was a Jew, or any person who has gone through the formal process of conversion to Judaism.

September 28, 2006

Fundies, Leave The Gays Alone

I really get bothered when religious Fundies whine about gay marriages and gay rights. Proud to Be A Canadian is all up in arms over the definition of family. Note to the Radical Right, we live in 2006 not the 1950's, when society norms were dictated by the big screen (where most of the actors in the 50's were gays pretending to be straight). Mad Zionist and his religious cronies speak think they are speaking for God. It bugs me when Jews who have been persecuted for years, turn around and persecute gays. I was born a heterosexual, almost every gay person on this planet today wasn't. Get over it. With all the stigmas attached, why would someone choose to be gay? They can't help it, just like I can't help enjoying drooling at a beautiful woman.I hate the God hates or at least dislikes gays argument. First off, prove there is a God. Secondly, prove that God hates or dislikes gays.I also don't like the argument that homosexuality is wrong because it doesn't lead to procreation. I'm married to an older woman. We have no kids, and it is too late now. I'm fine with that. When two 70 year olds get married, it is fine with the Religious Right too, even though procreation is out of the question.There is overwhelming evidence that homosexuality is natural. To be natural, it doesn't have to be a fifty fifty thing. Left handers are natural, but only make up around 10% of the population. There is no evidence that homosexuality is mainly due to nurture. None. Please show me a scientific study to back it up or STFU.Here is some evidence that shows that homosexuality can be caused during fetal development:

Here is a pretty good lecture on homosexuality and morality:

I have two issues with this that I disagree with. How does he specifically define morality? Morality according to who? And secondly, he attacks the statement that "it isn't natural, animals don't do it" totally erroneously. Homosexuality is rampant in the animal kingdom, especially among the more developed animals. Of course, bonobos don't have the intellectual superiority it takes to read a bible and to know that God hates them and declares their behavior to be unnatural.

Here is a pretty interesting and controversial theory on homosexual sex and evolution. Homosexuality has been documented in over 450 different vertabrate species (why would God create such a travesty;)). Evolution isn't just about mating and adapting, it is about surviving (not being food and finding food and shelter). In order for a species to keep going, there must be enough youngens who make it to the next generation. That is why so many social animals exist. There is a safety in numbers. Sexual bonding creates less tensions in many social animals, the bond also causes animals to be protective of one another. The vast majority of social insects don't exist to mate. And in the higher animal kingdom, there seems to be evolutionary benefits in homosexual behavior (albeit, most bi-sexual behavior).Lets face it, if every animal on this planet successfully mated, and every sperm was sacred, we would have ran out of natural resources a long long time ago.As far as family goes. Check out these dolphins:

Does God know what is going on in his oceans? I know, at least they aren't asking for equal rights or putting on a gay parade in the Dead Sea.....One more thing, the idea of kids growing up in gay homes is frowned upon by many. I'm open to research. Right now, there just isn't enough. If it turns out that a statistically larger proportion of these kids turn out to be molested by one of the parents or "friends" of the parents, or if the kids turn into welfare dependants or criminals (like it is with single parent homes where the struggling mom is a heterosexual).....then I'd be against it.

37 comments:

Growing up, I was always kind to people who were different. Many times I was the only friend of a highschool communist, raging nerd or homosexual.

It's not that I wasn't dismayed at their beliefs, phobic about their lifestyles or embarassed by the tape between the glasses. I just treated everyone with respect and dignity unless they personally tried to harm, annoy or molest.

Using religion to promote intolerance and hatred is one of the main reasons I am sans-diety. (The first is logic)

I believe my rights end where yours begin. I'm still grossed out by brokeback mountain and the folks who wear their homosexuality like a badge, but if they want to cohabitate and commit to each otherit's none of my business.

Personal unions that do not harm anyone are none of thr governments business either.

It is the government's business when it comes to benefits though and the law. That is where this becomes an issue. Luckily, science tends to win out in these issues when they go to the higher courts, and the Fundies usually just wimper away is disgust.

I believe everyone is sexually orientated to varying degrees. There is good evidence out now that 3rd and 4th sons are more likely to be gay due to the mother’s hormones or something. I know when I look at a group of people my eyes naturally search out the pretty and nubile. Apparently a pretty girl can release a shot of cocaine like substance into the brain of a heterosexual male. I imagine the same could happen to a gay guy when he sees a spunky guy.

Yet it could still me considered immoral even if it is natural. This is something I find hard to get my head around with religion. You can be born evil or with a propensity to evil and so are left at a bit of a disadvantage when it comes to salvation. Jesus had a huge and I mean HUGE advantage being half God and half man. I remember people weeping in church when being told, for the umpteenth time, that Jesus ‘died’ for them. Yet he was a god who couldn’t really die or even sin and is apparently alive and well - go figure. Salvation, if true, is a bit of a lottery for the mere human. If I were God I would save everyone and be a bit embarrassed if people worshipped and feared me. I am against making homosexuality too acceptable however, firmly believing that humans should be able to indulge in a bit of naughtiness. Being gay is mildly naughty but if you make it completely normal people will just push the boundary further out and we will be faced with normalizing greater atrocities.

I am always suprised how people can not distinguish between REAL threats, like Islamic Fascism or Communism, and irrational made up threats like homosexuality.

As a Jew, I am proud that the racist-apartheid-zionist-theocracy (Israel of course) is the one country in the middle east that celibrates the gay pride parade, has openly gay Generals serving in the army, and has had gay civil rights BEFORE it became fashionable in the rest of the world. Its not suprising that some of Israel's most vocal supporters are gay Palestinians who had to flee torture and death sentances in their homeland so they can live free in Israel.

What is suprising, and what I will never understand, are groups that hold up signs like "Gays for Palestinian Solidarity" including Canadian's own "peace" activists who was captured in Iraq (thank g-d his captors did not know about his sexuality). How could gays/lesbians stand up for societies that openly and proudly call for the killing of all gays and carry it out without hesitation? Is it a suicidal instinct?

/end rant

Gays and lesbians have time and time again proved that they are a responsible part of society and makes significant positive contributions where ever they live. They have earned the worlds respect, and yet the Pope still whales on them at every opportunity. Andrew Sullivan ("South Park conservative" and best blogger ever) remarked how things would probably be different if they violently took to the streets and called for the Pope's death... we tend to reward the worst human behavior.

Its also odd that "conservatives" want gays to be swinging singles partying every night and "liberals" want gays to marry in stable long term relationships. Gay marriage is a CONSERVATIVE idea!

Good for you Bacon for calling for equal rights for a demographic that more than anyone else has certainly earned it.

DF, I realize that dolphins would not be able to handle the Dead Sea, but they don't do parades either. The comic in me just put a mental picture of gay dolphins walking in a parade about the Dead Sea.

AA, the first video I linked is about the sibling study.You said "Being gay is mildly naughty but if you make it completely normal people will just push the boundary further out and we will be faced with normalizing greater atrocities." ********************What is normal? An Atheist Jew married to a an older woman who was raised secular Christian and who has no kids? Sure, I agree, that groping in public should not be for others to view unless you are in a Jamaican Hedonism resort. But that goes for all people.

BEAJ, I'v been buggin this Jewish Philosopher guy for a while- he would love you (with an axe). Before you go, here's a hint- he believes in the total, morally inerrant superiority of orthodox Judaism.

You could probably get the same milage out of him that you do out of your afore mentioned friends.

I am an orthodox Jew who likes Bacon's site and has it linked to my own blog, so I suggest the Ortho-bashing get nipped in the bud before it begins.

That said, I half agree with Bacon on homosexuality. Obviously homosexuality has at least some genetic links, and anyone who doubts that is only fooling themselves. I'd say being gay is a combo of society and genetics, in that social factors can push fence-sitters one way or the other, while genetic gays who are 100% all out homosexual will go gay no matter what.

Genetic homosexuals should not be hated, rather we should be looking to prevent it as we do with any genetic disorder. Science should be able to detect the homosexual gene by toddler age and have a vaccine to cure people of this disease. To let people of such illness go untreated is barbaric.

Secondary homosexuality is the social issue we must be vigilant against. Those who could be swayed either way should be dissuaded by society to choose the gay path for obvious reasons. Women are particularly vulnerable to secondary homosexuality.

As far as public displays go, all fornication parades should be banned. I don't want our streets to be a place for fetish celebration of any kind. This should be common sense to all but the most extreme of voyeurs who want to get off on this sort of thing.

Bacon, I thought you believe in statistics and science. Do you not pay attention to your own creed? If homosexuality causes a shortened life span statistically, which it does, wouldn't it be worth treating? When people are born with other mental ailments, like schitzophrenia or autism, we don't say its cool. When a person has bi-polar disorder or depression we give them pills. When somebody has ADD we have ritalin. When you talk about trying to cure Alzheimers with stem cells why are you ignoring homosexuality? Gay people will die from AIDS and other disease, or suffer terrible physical and mental abuses, in disproportionate numbers to the rest of the GP. Don't you care? Do you not see that you are letting them suffer?

Finally, I obviously don't have any stats on this, but if a gay vaccine had been invented by now I bet you a huge percentage of the gay population would take it in a heart beat. Face it, it is a defective gene and a deviant lifestyle option, one that causes far more harm than good, so why aren't you on the front of the "save the gays" mission so that science can help fix them once and for all.

Defects are never good for anyone, and if they can be treated or cured they should be.

Not if the gay males had been cured by science first. Clearly gay male sex is the bigger problem of the two. BTW, socially stygmatizing homosexuality would eliminate many bi fence-sitters who can go either way - thus saving lives. Left-handedness is better compared to baldness in terms of its relevence, and we know what baldies go through to fix their problems!

Bacon, you are choosing to be atheist - remember, we have free will - as well as living a childless life. Genetics is the point we are discussing, not choice. Remember, you yourself point out that most homosexuals are genetically programmed that way. Or, are you suggesting you are programmed to marry older women, not believe in God, and have no kids? If you do think we are all genetically programmed to that minutia than you believe more in our being guided from above than the fundies you hate that blame everything on Satan.

MadZionist - First, please note that on this issue, you and Hamas agree. Secondly, free will is an interesting comment coming from somebody who believes God knows everything, including what choices we will make in the future implying predestination. If God does NOT know what choice we will make, then he is not truly all knowing. So take your pick. Either gays "choose" to be gay and there's no God, or there is a God and gays have no choice and therefore should not be punished for a choice they never made.

MadZionist - First, please note that on this issue, you and Hamas agree.

Really? Hamas thinks genetic homosexuality is a disability that we need to find a vaccine for? Kindly show me an example of their leadership taking this position. Also, find me a place where Hamas has taken a position on secondary homosexuality being significantly reduced by eliminating the genetic homosexuality disorder.

I think you are full of crap, with all do respect, but if you can back up your claim with facts than I'll be happy to agree with Hamas on this issue.

For the record, the AIDS stats on gays are largely bullshit. I can probably track down the article I read on early AIDS research if anyone wants.

As for the notion of a 'gay gene'.. do you really think that sexuality it that linear? The fact the animals get each other off regardless of sex should be an indicator that it's not. People are attracted to different sexes, genders, activities to varying degrees. Most people that are labelled as gay (by themselves or others) would probably be attracted to certain aspects of the opposite sex too. The fact that arousal isn't based on sex but often on how people are presented, their body size, their personality, interests, face, age, etc should make it obvious that sexual attraction can't be boiled down to a simple anatomical difference. I suppose Mad Zionist would think it's fine if a women is shoving a dildo up a guys arse, but would throw up if he thought a guy could take another guy up the shitter.

In fact, if you are looking at the sexual diversity of nature in relation to humanity, isn't it odd how conservative we are? I'm sure there's a lot of repression going on in fundy bedrooms worldwide.

I'm sure the disproportionally high number of gay men who have contracted AIDS will be comforted by your political correctness.

As for the notion of a 'gay gene'.. do you really think that sexuality it that linear?

Clearly many gay people are born as genetic homosexuals, and if you don't believe that you have your head in the sand.

People are attracted to different sexes, genders, activities to varying degrees.

Yes, this is secondary homosexuality - more of a mental than physical or chemical disorder. This is why we must help them so that the fence-sitteres who are influenced more by social pressure than genetics will choose the healthier options. Finding a cure for genetic homosexuality disorder would go a long way towards that end.

I suppose Mad Zionist would think it's fine if a women is shoving a dildo up a guys arse, but would throw up if he thought a guy could take another guy up the shitter.

If the woman with the strapon is married to the guy she's doing, and it makes them happy, than that's fine with me. However, guy on guy anal sex is hazardous and those afflicted by this disorder would be helped greatly by a vaccine. Same for all deviant sexual disorders, by the way, including pedophilia, beastiality, necrophilia, etc.

In fact, if you are looking at the sexual diversity of nature in relation to humanity, isn't it odd how conservative we are?

No. Not anymore odd than seeing how we eat with silverware, have doctors who invent medicines that save lives, have clothes to put over us when we are cold...being civilized is a conservative trait, and is what separates us from the animals.

"...but would throw up if he thought a guy could take another guy up the shitter. "

I read a biography of Richard Burton the British explorer that claimed he extolled the virtues of the above practice because the anus is round and tight and a females entrance is slitty and kind of looser. It was like the anus was a better design for inserting penises into and gave the inserter a more satisfying feel. It’s also a bit dirty, actually a lot dirtier and we all know sex is a lot more fun if it’s dirty. That last sentence is my own observation. Is this something that should be taught? I guess we should leave that question for gay MP’s to legislate.

I just thought that as this sort of thing is perfectly normal now this discussion wont raise anyone’s eyebrow. My definition of normal is that which doesn’t result in the involuntary raising of an eyebrow or being gob smacked.

There does seem to be a prevalent type of homosexual that indulges in meeting strangers in public toilets and getting it off. Some have literally thousands of these liaisons but then we have prostitutes too. The main difference is that it is not usually done in public toilets but then I may be edging back into fun/sex/dirty territory here. I think if you discovered your son/partner/father was doing this you wouldn’t think it was exactly ‘normal’.

Certainly the Old Testament had severe punishments set aside for sodomy but also for insolent children too. A man loving a man in the platonic sense, maybe with the odd kiss and a cuddle, was perfectly OK.

Legalization of sodomy may be grist to the mill of Islamic grievances against Western immorality but I guess that’s their problem – yet they seem to want to make it our problem too.

Mad Zionist,I find it hard to believe that there is a social pressure that pushes "fencesitters to be gay. I don't think that religious conservatives trying as hard as they can to tear down the seperation of church and state with lame attempts not to mention God in their arguments constitutes a "social pressure" to be homosexual.

The fact that something is genetic and affects only a small amount of the population doesn't imply that it is a disease. People with red hair have an increased risk of skin disorders, but no one is trying to "cure" them. The reason for that is that we realize that this is not a disease, it is simply a difference.

I also disagree that most gay people would like to be changed into heterosexuals. I didn't wake up one morning after puberty thinking "I have a couple different ways I can go here", and I doubt most gay people did either. I have a couple gay relatives, and I don't believe they're love is based on simply how that person can satisfy them sexually. The love that they feel is exactly like the love of a heterosexual couple. The fact that you don't understand it doesn't make it wrong, nor does it make it unnatural.

MZ:The above comment should be required reading for everyone who tries to bash the rationale for conservative sexual morality.Which 1? This 1?Your momma.I'm sure the disproportionally high number of gay men who have contracted AIDS will be comforted by your political correctness.As opposed to the proportionately high # of folks who've gotten it?I wonder: how many people have to have a 'genetic disorder', for it not to be a disorder any more? 10? 20? 10,000? Let's see, slippery slope, guilt by association, oh, the list of fallacies. Here's a link for you:http://www.hatecrime.org/subpages/hitler/hitler.htmlTell me there AREN'T any parallels.Bigot.

I've always found the argument that homosexuals should not be allowed to marry because they can't procreate to be hysterical, as well. For one thing, there are many homosexuals who do have children through artificial insemination, the use of surrogate mothers, etc. Many also choose to adopt. And, as you point out, plenty of heterosexual couples either cannot or choose not to have children. I once asked a gay-marriage-basher if heterosexual couples who either can't or won't have children should be allowed to marry, and he said no. I'd like to see them legislate that one. LMAO

When a society accepts gay marriage and considers homosexual activity as perfectly normal it has reached an advanced level of sophistication. Other indicators are an abundance of food, readily available technology, countless venues for entertainment, extremely high levels of individualism, mercy for criminals with almost endless second chances available, low reproduction, low church attendance, low mortality, welfare, overseas holidays, etc. I am here describing the modern societies of the West that are indeed great places to dwell and thrive.We almost all live a Bohemian lifestyle. Almost all of us are princes and princesses and get quite indignant when others want to impose their ‘values’ on us. It seems quite boorish to deny homosexuals the same rights as heterosexuals. Unfortunately at our borders the barbarian hordes are assembling. Not just at the border, they have already penetrated our defences. They consider our lifestyle to be an affront against their God. The West is Sodom and Gomorrah. Where are we going to find an opposing army of Crusaders to confront and defeat them? We have become way too effete to lift a manicured finger in our own defence. We don’t even have the ability to replace ourselves now. It’s just a matter of time before the darkness engulfs our gay (in both senses of the word) civilization.

BEAJ, the problem with these fuckwitts is that they don't understand that they are prejudiced. They think that prejudice is discrimination without reason and they have the reasons becuase their parents, their teachers and their priests told them so. So they have no reason at all, they just have an assumption that they have reasons although these reasons will never be clearly defined or supported by fact. Trying to find a sane person on this planet is like trying to find a zebra on the moon. Everyone thinks they're sane but that's just because they cannot see through their own learned assumptions. Despite being an absolute atheist I sometimes appreciate the saying "kill them all and let god sort them out". Trying to get sense out of them is hopeless until we come up with some way to make people smarter. Let the argument with that muppet go and leave him to a future where his children are ashamed of neaderthal from whom they came.

As a fag hag with a gay best friend, let me tell you that no one CHOOSES to be gay. Without exception, every gay guy and lesbian I know did not WANT to be gay. Every single one. However, I want to note that they would not be straight if they could, because being gay is a part of who they are, and being straight would deny that part of themselves.

And that is how homosexuality is - it's a part of who they are. It is like brown eyes - simply something they are born with.

Not quite. Given that no 'gay gene' has been discovered, I would argue that it has not been definitively proven that homosexuality is linked to genetics. HOWEVER, certainly it is still bigoted to be anti-gay. It doesn't hurt the non-gay person to be exposed to a gay guy, unless they are THAT insecure about their sexuality...in which case they have other problems to think about.

The average gay man has a hyperthalamus the same size as the average womans. Of course, those who say that being gay is due to nurture will say that the hyperthalamus of a gay person changed because of their lifestyle.

Maybe it's because I'm young, but I really don't care if people are gay or not. They shouldn't need a gene to justify their sexual preferences. Gay anal sex is no less gross than straight anal sex. Personally I'm not interested in other people's sex lives regardless of their sexual orientation. I also tend not to notice who's gay unless they're holding hands with someone of the same sex, or say so, but that's just me. And if they want to get married, who cares? I don't get a say in straight marriages that are obviously damned from the beginning and done for all the wrong reasons. So why should I get a say in gay marriage?

That's part of being from the "whatever" generation. It has it's good points.

On another note, a lot of homosexuality in nature (if we must distinguish people from nature) happens in birds, especially penguins. In light of March of the Penguins I found that amusing.

I am surprised no one pounced on the "Homosexuality shortens lives" crap I just love people quoting the Christian Faschists as if their propaganda was fact and not fiction derived to support their homophobic positions. Their "Data" was obtained from obituaries in the Gay rags. 1) Not everyone in those obituaries are gay... Mayor Moscone for example2) Very few gay peoples obits are published in the rags due to familial influence or just a lack if identification with those publications.

BTW My best mentor friend died at 87 gay as a 3 dollar bill. My cousin died at 48 straight as a lazer beam